Rating: 
Summary: Wonderfully complex at first glance but...
Review: The detail given this game is awe inspiring at first, but on close examinantion it's often excessive and superfluous. I found myself stripping away layer after layer until it was actually playable. There must be hundreds of different unit types, and I'm still not sure if it isn't all the same just to get a huge stack of generic spearmen, throw them into the fray, and let the computer auto-calculate. The game offers a huge array of diplomatic agents, but they rarely prove useful. Diplomats and princesses have difficulty actually finding a ruler to propose an alliance to, and even if they do, the AI almost always rejects the proposal. So the player usually ends up not bothering with diplomats and letting computer players come to them. I found spies to be the most useless of all. Supposedly they dig up dirty laundry about a certain individual, but they are absurdly easy to catch and have never in my experience actually succeeded in their mission. Assassins succeed sometimes, but not enough usually to make paying for them worthwhile. Inquisitors are the only agents in the game I found to be useful enough to actually make.
For the most part, the diplomacy part of the game is a joke. The designers should have made this aspect of the game stronger. As in almost all games of strategy, the player gets better results from spending that money on troops and sending them in.The Pope.
He is perhaps the single most annoying aspect of the game. If you even take back a territory which you lost a turn ago to a surprise attack, he threatens to excommunicate your faction for defending itself. For Catholic nations, excommunication is practically unavoidable. And if the player has built piddly little border forts and town militias, it proves to be no more than an annoyance. The Pope's power is so weak in the game that once again, it is more expedient not only to take your territory back, but to go on a counteroffensive. In fact, it is most convenient to simply conquer the Vatican and put a puppet Pope in place so you can do what you want. The gameplay of Medieval: Total War is certainly addictive, but in the end it is little more than your standard strategy game of unbridled and unthinking aggression. The AI is unpredictable enough that it scarcely matters whether you're allied with them or not. They might just get in their heads one morning that they want to attack you when you are much stronger or be peaceful neighbors for a century while they are strong. Even on the expert level, this game presents relatively little challenge for all but the toughest factions. If you have some time that needs to be consumed, I guarantee the mastery of Europe will take hours of your time, but otherwise, look for something with same premise and without all the pretense of complexity.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Enhancement of Original
Review: Very nice expansion pack. My experience with these packs is you generally don't get your money's worth. This one is the exception, a fine enhancement of the basic game plus the added campaign of the viking invasion set on an English mapboard. A wide range of added units in both the Viking campaign and the normal game. Gameplay is enhanced with smarter AI in both the battlefield and turn based portions of the game. The new pre-battle troop modification and selection screen is a nice addition. You can actually select the order in which your reinforcements arrive and also which units you want for the intial force involved in the battle. Overall a fine addition to the original and I can't wait for Rome Total War's arrival. Great work Activision and Creative Assembly!!!
Rating:
Summary: A Great addition to a Great game!
Review: When medieval total war hit the shelves I was elated. From the moment I played the demo, I fell in love with the game. Finally, a game that focuses on realism and the fine tactics of combat. Finally, a game with broad scope and yet a lot of depth too. Finally, a game that seemed to understand just what I had always wanted in a strategy game. Medieval was a great success, so needless to say, I was excited about this expansion. I just recieved the expansion in the mail today (5/8/03) and I'm happy to report that it's great! There's no denying it, most exapansion packs are rip-offs that you regret buying. Viking Invasion however, is well worth it's money to anyone who thurouly enjoys the original game. The premise of the pack is to turn back the clock to 793 AD, when the Vikings raided northumbria in britain. This marked the beggining of a reign of terror by the norsemen. At the same time, there were numerous small kingdoms struggling for control of the british isles. It makes for a very interesting and completely logical explansion campagne. You are now offered a new era to play in which will give you a completely new map (a map of britain) and several new civilizations. There are over 40 new units, most of which are pretty cool - most notabley berserkers, Huscarls, houscarles and fyrdman. The new campagne is both fun, and a bit more challenging than the previous one. You'll aslo be happy to see that there are now many more sieges than before, with villages and warrior halls being precursors to forts, keeps and castles. It's pretty cool, when assaulting a village there is no gate, just a stockade around a village filled with buildings where the enemy is. It's nice to finally see more combat inside actuall villages and cities, though it's not perfect (units have a bit of trouble navigating around buildings sometimes). The improvements the expansion pack offers also spill into the original game. This includes new playable civs in the original campagne as well as some new units. The real gem is the gameplay enhancements. which offer fire and flaming arrows, some tweaks and gameplay polishing, a new pre battle screen that REALLY makes a difference when you're decinding what to do before a battle, a new reinforcment screen to plan your reinforcements and some other stuff. All together if you still play and enjoy medieval, than go buy this right away! If you've already gotten tired of medieval, this MAY be enough to renew your interest, but it's still basically the same game. Pros: Flaming arrows and catipult shots, New pre-battle screen is a MUCH NEEDED addition, new reinforcment screen is helpful, the new campagne is a nice change and offers new fun and even more variety to the game, 40 new units, each of which is cool in it's own right, new buildings, the new campagne has village battles and multiple gameplay twaeks and changes that are really phat, the original campagne is not ignored, it gets many of the same improvements and 2 new civs and some new units too to round out a really good expansion! Disapointments: I wish the pre-battle system allowed you to see the vices and virtues of the generals, flaming missiles are automatic (you cant toggle or CHOOSE whether or not to use them), I wish they would have improved diplomacy a bit, I was hoping to see battering rams and siege towers but no.
Rating:
Summary: much better than "Medieval"
Review: Really I wanted to love "Medieval" but got sick of it quickly for the following reasons: 1. Endless instances of "a heir who escaped detection" has arisen to slosh up your rear. This, admittedly, was cool the first time, but not over 10 times in a single game! Sheesh!
2. Mass revolts in nearly all your provinces (typically about 1160) for no discernible reason.
3. Neighboring provinces declaring war on you (or refusing an alliance) in the face of all historical logic or (more irritatingly) the logic of that moment in the game. I thought the AI, at least as far as the part that makes broad strategic decisions such as whether to enter or withdraw from war, was really poorly written. I mean, there could be a province you have surrounded for HUNDREDS of years as an ally without touching (say, Poland) -- and furthermore you've lent them aid repeatedly in the past, and you've completely got them surrounded by a million guys, and they'll attack you for no reason. It seemed like the way the AI was written was that as soon as it sees you're pretty much wrapping up a war with one foe, another would attack, no matter who or with what chances of success. Like clockwork. This got really annoying.
4. The Pope stuff about being excommunicated got really annoying after a while, especially when you had not been the agressor in a war, or when you were merely defending your own turf. This excommunication stuff should also have been limited to one or two instances per game. Fortunately, little of these annoyances plague Viking: Total War. I am happy to say that it can boast nearly all of the best elements of "Medieval," but for the most part without the annoyances outlined above. Another thing I liked about the game is that the "Easy" level was inarguably easy. This can be nice when you just want to see what the end of a game is like. Although the manual says playing as the Welsh is the hardest, actually I had little difficulty with them. The Picts -- now that was unpleasant. Just a gradual chipping your way down south, with no "breaks" whatsoever. Another thing I really like about the game is that I think it gives you a much clearer and more useful grasp of the history of the period than does the original "Medieval". You begin to understand, for example, why the Anglo-Saxons, though by no means wusses, were so helpless in the face of Vikings -- when you see the advantages of HOW the Vikings attacked. One thing I wish this game would have had more of is the occasional historical notes (such as about Thomas a Beckett or the Albigensians, or whatever). These really lent a convincing atmosphere to "Medieval," but sadly, in the expansion there is only one (at the beginning). I also think you should have been able to cross the North Sea and attack the Vikings. This was another disappointment. But on the whole, the best so far.
Rating:
Summary: Good balance, worth buying.
Review: Excellent game, with a good balance of stradegy and tactics. If you are simply interested in empire management, Medieval allows the player to automate battles so that you can concentrate more on tech developement, economic growth, and troop production, but you would be missing out on a very good games engine.
Battles are realisticly reproduced, with factors such as weather, terrain, and morale being important for victory. Some effort has also been made to be true to history, which leads to some empires having more advantage then others, but this works well as the game informs the player of extra difficulty of playing as a given country.
Great game for single player; only used the multiplayer (which only allows for battles) a few times, and am not a big fan (but I really enjoy empire building).
Rating: 
Summary: Hi it's me again
Review: To: The Creative Assembly
Re: Total War: Medieval Total War (MTW)
(I didn't play Viking Invasion yet)
Introduction: This in not a review of MTW but a plea to The Creative Assembly to develop the "dream" strategy war game. Because MTW is the closest I've ever played to the "dream" game it serves as the default. I'll highlight the positive aspects of MTW & suggest improvements. Sometimes I'll use examples from other war games.
1) Turn based with real time battles: This is the single most important aspect of a strategy war game because it allows for much more detail (as opposed to real time, like Age of Empires).
2) Three map "depths":
2.1) World: this we do have in MTW with some nice features like population loyalty influenced by the distance of the king from the province (you can make it even more difficult to hold non-homeland provinces far from the king), different agents etch.
2.2) Provincial: this map we do not have in MTW. The provincial management in MTW is not detailed enough. Lords of the Realm II (LotR) is preferred here:
2.2.a) Various resources that you need & can get hold of by exploitation or purchasing
2.2.b) Keeping the population happy by more than only low taxes (food, health, low conscription etch)
2.2.c) Armies on the provincial map destroying resources by marching over it
2.2.d) The calamities can be more severe: apart from what happen in MTW (floods, disease etch) the calamities must also infect the armies in the province where it occurs: army & population sizes may be reduced by disease & plagues. The bigger the army the higher the risk (see the game "Risk"). Armies & population can be protected against disease & plagues by high food quantities, bigger castles etch
2.2e) "Armies eat" - armies feeding from the food in the province: make sure you can feed the army AND the population (or your army only during a siege)
2.2.e) Desertion or revolt by armies due to non-payment or low food quantities etch
2.2.f) Moving away or revolt by the population due to low food quantities, high taxes etch
2.2.g) Dispatching resources between provinces
2.2.h) Buildings & exploitation of resources go quicker or slower depending on how many workers you assign
2.3) Battlefields: this justifies a separate paragraph:
3) Battlefields
3.1) Battlefields: this is the absolute highlight of MTW: high artificial intelligence, ranks of generals, fatigue, morale, valor, elevation, hiding in bush, group formations, re-enforcements etch etch. One big improvement needs to be made: the enemy generals practically commit suicide by storming into battle. I simply keep my general a bit to the background, protect my missile units by sending my hand-to-hand combat units into combat & then aim all my missiles at the enemy general. Once the enemy general is eliminated it's 70% easier to win the battle. Simply make the general 5 times more difficult to kill or figure out something else.
3.2) Castle sieges: give the attacker also limited time: practical factors like availability of food, desertion, disease etch may force the attacker to assault or withdraw, depending how long the defender can hold out (limited by similar factors, especially food quantities).
3.3) Castle assaults: why can MTW's brilliant battlefields not be extended to castle assaults? LotR is again preferred here (apart from low artificial intelligence & MTW's self-shooting towers). Moats, battering rams, siege towers, hot liquids, missile units on walls with advantage etch.
3.4) Enemy fleets in MTW don't combine, making it easier to destroy them one at a time.
3.5) Realistic naval battles shall be nice.
4) General: Other realistic features that can be added:
a) NB: The never-ending rivalry between heirs for the throne: princes murdered each other or their own father, kings murdered possible competitors (even their own sons), queens & concubines murdered kings etch etch. How many kings died peacefully? A heir inheriting the throne without incident (assassination, "accident" or downright civil war) was the exception rather than the rule. Build this reality into the game. My suggestion: the king & high-ranking generals must always be exposed to assassination by other members of their own faction (apart from civil war, which forms part of the game already). The risk attached to to a high-ranking official with low loyalty must not only be civil war but also assassination or "coup de tat". Every time a king dies there should be a high risk of civil war due to rivalry between royals even if all royalty was loyal to the previous king. The loyalty of generals may even change from time to time so the king has to keep an eye on them.
b) Instead of eliminating a faction you can choose to make it's king a loyal (or maybe not so loyal) vassal of your faction, paying tribute annually - in exchange for higher loyalty by the population, for instance - (or was this only a feature of antiquity, in the times of the city-state?).
c) This type of game for any age or location is possible, I suppose. You can, for instance, replay the rise of civilization in Mesopotamia, the Antique Greek civilization & the rivalry between Sparta & Athens, the history of antique Israel & the conquests of king David, the history of Rome, the Middle Ages, the age of (recent) colonization, up to the modern age with a replay of the recent Iraq War etch. I'm sure you can even re-play the Anglo-Boer War!
The more realistically one can re-play history the nicer. I'm looking forward for a realistic strategy war game for the older, more serious, historian!?
Well, if I didn't make my point by now I never will, I won't bother you again! I'll be waiting for that "dream" game!
Rating:
Summary: Wish list of improvements
Review: Please excuse my bad English, it's not my mother tongue. Pro's:
How do one list the pro's of such a great game? Rather I'll try to name the factors distinguishing MTW from other "war" games, making it stand out heads & shoulders:
1) Well, basically it's the fact that it's a turn-based game, giving scope for more detail because the computer's RAM memory can be used for a battle scene or world map etch. instead of accommodating the whole game like in real-time games.
2) Excellent artificial intelligence except enemy generals who practically commit suicide by charging into the heat of the battle. I keep my general in the background, my hand-to-hand soldiers protect my archers & my archers all aim for the enemy general. Once the enemy general is eliminated the battle is a push-over. It also serves to gradually weaken the enemy by removing it's leadership one by one. My suggestion is that the general gives 50% morale when not locked in battle, 100% when locked in battle (or shooting). Cons:
By listing the cons I'll mostly compare MTW with another great turn-based game, "Lords of the Realm". There are several things in LoR that I'd like to see in MTW. This is the "wish list":
1) 3 map levels: a) World Map; b) Provincial Map; c) Battle Map. If the armies can march on the provincial map & destroy facilities it shall be nice (see "Lords of the Realm").
2) More detailed provincial management: resources like money, wood, food, iron, stone etch. Every province must separately have enough resources to sustain itself. Armies eat food of the province it's in. Resources can be bought or be send from province to province, which (caravan of resources) can be destroyed by enemy armies (see "Lords of the Realm").
3) a Sanction if you brake an alliance, like decline in influence.
4) Sieges must be more detailed: moats, battering rams, siege towers, defending missile units on walls with an advantage, hot liquids, more detailed castles etch (see "Lords of the Realm").
5) Can we have naval battles please? MTW is not the game for a person who likes a lot of fast action. It's for the person who's interested in history & like to "replay" history. I couldn't get hold of the "Viking Invasion" expansion pack yet.
Rating:
Summary: Great game
Review: The artificial intelligence in this game is nice except for the generals who commit suicide on the battlefield by storming into the heat of the battle. Sieges are not realistic & detailed enough. I like turn based game more than real time games (like Age of Empires). You're not gonna belief this - I can't get hold of the expansion pack (Viking Invasion) - not available in South Africa (well, I couldn't find 1 yet), & not shipped to RSA from USA or UK. Great game!
Rating:
Summary: 'Dedicated' or 'Shared'(Integrated) Video Card!
Review: For laptop users,I suggest 'Intel P4 2.6 Processor w/400 MHz FSB',512MB RAM Memory,8X DVD ROM,40GB Harddrive,'ATI Mobility RADEON 9000'(64MB Dedicated Video Memory). Remember to stay away from 'shared(Integrated) Video Memory' cards,they crash after two minutes,but the 'Dedicated Video Memory' cards keep on going and going,like the 'Energizer Bunny'. Make sure you don't go under or over '512MB RAM Memory',your game will crash after two minutes if you do. If you remember these tips,you'll save your self some money and heartache.
Rating: 
Summary: Collecting Dust with Empire Earth
Review: M:TW sounded great in the beginning and I waited for the price to come down. I bought it a few months back and was bored with it after only a week. The AI was lousy and, as other reviewers have pointed out, cheats constantly. And silly things like the never ending "new improved Pope" that keeps sprouting up like a bad weed on your terazzo patio. Yes, it is in the context of "history" but the AI just keeps doing the same thing. Sort of annoying.
And I didn't get the battle scenes everyone was raving about - it was very disappointing. It reminded me of a game I used to play called "Art of War" when armies would sort of shuffle at each other and pluck each other down with arrows. For the uninitiated, that game was played with MS DOS. Point being, the graphics were pretty lame.
So, my M:TW copy is collecting dust right next to my other waste of money, Empire Earth. I am still playing Age of Empires II and it just never gets dull.
|
